Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22592699›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012

Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for late radiation tissue injury.

Michael H Bennett, John Feldmeier, Neil Hampson, Robert Smee, Christopher Milross

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 89 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Systematic review of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for the treatment of non-neurological soft tissue radiation-related injuries.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2014
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. In search of a treatment for radiation-induced optic neuropathy.Current treatment options in neurology · 2015
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Old but new methods in radiation oncology: hyperbaric oxygen therapy.International journal of clinical oncology · 2013
    Review
  9. Anal cancer: are we making progress?Current oncology reports · 2013
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael H BennettDepartment of Anaesthesia, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, Australia. m.bennett@unsw.edu.au
John Feldmeier
Neil Hampson
Robert Smee
Christopher Milross
Prince of Wales Hospital · AUUniversity of Toledo Medical Center · USVirginia Mason Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCancer is a significant global health problem. Radiotherapy is a treatment for many cancers and about 50% of patients having radiotherapy with be long-term survivors. Some will experience late radiation tissue injury (LRTI) developing months or years later. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) has been suggested as a treatment for LRTI based upon the ability to improve the blood supply to these tissues. It is postulated that HBOT may result in both healing of tissues and the prevention of problems following surgery.

objectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of HBOT for treating or preventing LRTI. SEARCH

methodsIn March 2011 we updated the searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1), MEDLINE, EMBASE, DORCTIHM and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of HBOT versus no HBOT on LRTI prevention or healing. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently evaluated the quality of the relevant trials using the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and extracted the data from the included trials. MAIN

resultsEleven trials contributed to this review (669 participants). For pooled analyses, investigation of heterogeneity suggested important variability between trials but there was some evidence that HBOT is more likely to achieve mucosal coverage with osteoradionecrosis (ORN) (risk ratio (RR) 1.3; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 1.6, P = 0.003, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 5). From single studies there was a significantly increased chance of improvement or cure following HBOT for radiation proctitis (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.0 to 2.9, P = 0.04, NNTB 5), and following both surgical flaps (RR 8.7; 95% CI 2.7 to 27.5, P = 0.0002, NNTB = 4) and hemimandibulectomy (RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.8, P = 0.001, NNTB 5). There was also a significantly improved probability of healing irradiated tooth sockets following dental extraction (RR 1.4; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.7, P = 0.009, NNTB 4).There was no evidence of benefit in clinical outcomes with established radiation injury to neural tissue, and no data reported on the use of HBOT to treat other manifestations of LRTI. These trials did not report adverse effects. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThese small trials suggest that for people with LRTI affecting tissues of the head, neck, anus and rectum, HBOT is associated with improved outcome. HBOT also appears to reduce the chance of ORN following tooth extraction in an irradiated field. There was no such evidence of any important clinical effect on neurological tissues. The application of HBOT to selected patients and tissues may be justified. Further research is required to establish the optimum patient selection and timing of any therapy. An economic evaluation should be undertaken.

Indexed as

Anus NeoplasmsHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansHyperbaric OxygenationNeoplasmsOsteoradionecrosisRadiation InjuriesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRectal Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID22592699
OpenAlexW4232222367

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.